Napoleon dies 1807, who takes power in France

RousseauX

Donor
Napoleon's son and legitimate heir was not born until 1811, he did have a bastard son from a mistress at this point. Let's say Napoleon dies after Tilst. What happens with the succession? Is this a Neo-Diadochi scenario between various Bonapartist claimants (brothers etc) with factions of the army backing one side or the other? None of Napoleon's brothers were particularly talented and the bastard son is obviously an infant at this point. They are sitting on top of a power structure with -a lot- of talented/ambitious men. Which of the marshals becomes regent or power behind the throne?
 
Last edited:
I don't think any of the marshals could generate enough support on their own, but civil war is unlikely. I wouldn't be surprised if you get Republicanism come back in some form.
 
Per the succession law in 1804, the claim should pass 1st to Joseph and his legitimate male heirs (turns out he wouldn't have any), and 2ndly to Louis and his legitimate male line... illegitimate offspring were excluded, as were Nap's other brothers who had found ways of pissing him off :p
 
Per the succession law in 1804, the claim should pass 1st to Joseph and his legitimate male heirs (turns out he wouldn't have any), and 2ndly to Louis and his legitimate male line... illegitimate offspring were excluded, as were Nap's other brothers who had found ways of pissing him off :p
Minor (or possibly major, if you try to pursue potential alternate Bonaparte successions far enough :p) correction - Nap placed little bro Jerome back into the line of succession in 1806, after he had his marriage to his American wife annulled and agreed to marry into European nobility. He would've been last in the Salic "chain", after Nap II, Joseph, Louis... Lucien and his heirs were still excluded, I suppose because of his cavortings with the hated British :)
Of course, if things hadn't gotten so chaotic immediately after Nap's return from the Russian calamity, that could've changed again... I'd imagine Nap was a little miffed at Jerome after the "Mir Castle incident" :p
 
I don't think any of the marshals could generate enough support on their own, but civil war is unlikely. I wouldn't be surprised if you get Republicanism come back in some form.
I have to disagree slightly (I'll explain why its slightly)
Bernadotte had earned enough support from among his men to be considered a contender (how serious his claim was taken would depend on the Bonapartes, any royalists and republicans, and the Allied Coalition). Remember IOTL, Bernadotte was acclaimed as heir to the Crown of Sweden. Because he was placed in a position to do so, he began colluding with the Allies. and Tsar Alexander I even suggested that Bernadotte be made the King of France, bypassing both the Bonapartist claim and the Bourbon claim.

Had Bernadotte traded his Swedish crown for the French crown, its likely that the terms of the treaties of Paris and the Congress of Vienna may have been less harsh toward France because Bernadotte would've been seen as the least likely to threaten the general peace of Europe. Only reason this didnt happen was because Britain pushed for the return of the Bourbons and eventually convinced Austria to side with them in their demand for the Bourbon Restoration
 
Bernardotte was disliked by the others Marshalls.

Davout was ready to duel Bernadotte after what Bernadotte writed to Davout during the Battle of Auerstadt...
 
Bernardotte was disliked by the others Marshalls.

Davout was ready to duel Bernadotte after what Bernadotte writed to Davout during the Battle of Auerstadt...
The marshals had been routinely quarrelling with each other so nothing unique there and, if anything, Davout generally disliked by his colleagues, probably to a greater degree than Bernadotte who had a generally pleasant personality.

The whole episode with Auerstadt is tricky because the problem started with Napoleon's order to fall back from Naumburg and get across the Prussian line of retreat (Nappy completely misread the situation and thought that he is going to face the main Prussian army). Davout demanded to be in charge because his corps marched first, after which Bernadotte opted for following the order by marching separately for Dornburg. Davout marched toward Auerstadt and unexpectedly bumped (literally, there were no reconnaissance troops) into the main Prussian army. Due to the terrible state of the roads Bernadotte would not be able to get to Auerstadt anyway. BTW, in the following Battle of Lubeck he cooperated with Murat and Soult just fine.

Anyway, in 1807 Bernadotte was not in a position to claim the throne because he was fighting in Poland and Eastern Prussia. The throne, would go to Joseph by succession law of 1804 and, if needed, Bernadotte would be probably the first to support him: besides being married to the Clary sisters, they were personally friendly.
 
At this date the Spanish and Russian Wars is not guaranteed, so even without a SS+ teir general or leadership, just sitting on what they have without starting any big offensive wars might enable whoever takes power to succeed if France only has to play defense agenst a frustrated England.
 
At this date the Spanish and Russian Wars is not guaranteed, so even without a SS+ teir general or leadership, just sitting on what they have without starting any big offensive wars might enable whoever takes power to succeed if France only has to play defense agenst a frustrated England.
In 1807 France is at war with Russia and Prussia (4th Coalition) - fighting was going on in Poland and Eastern Prussia. Depending upon the precise timing Friedland may or may not happen but after Eilau (in which Nappy could easily be killed) peace “by exhaustion” could be made with the terms much better for Prussia and not offensive for Russia. No CS either. So there could be a chance for the lasting peace in which even Britain could join (in OTL after this campaign was over Bernadotte as a governor of the German territories was rather effectively involved in violation of the CS so understanding of the problem was there).
 
In 1807 France is at war with Russia and Prussia (4th Coalition) - fighting was going on in Poland and Eastern Prussia. Depending upon the precise timing Friedland may or may not happen but after Eilau (in which Nappy could easily be killed) peace “by exhaustion” could be made with the terms much better for Prussia and not offensive for Russia. No CS either. So there could be a chance for the lasting peace in which even Britain could join (in OTL after this campaign was over Bernadotte as a governor of the German territories was rather effectively involved in violation of the CS so understanding of the problem was there).
I should have been more specific sorry about that. What I mean to say that the main war with Russia in 1812 (the death March on Moscow that destroyed the grand army) is still avertable and the grand army is still intact so if France does not make any big plays (Spain or russia) and keeps on defense it would be in the best intrest of France.
 
Last edited:
I should have been more specific sorry about that. What I mean to say that the main war with Russia in 1812 (the death March on Moscow that destroyed the grand army) is still avertable and the grand army is still intact so if France does not make any big plays (Spain or russia) and keeps on defense it would be in the best intrest of France.
Agree. At that point a peace could be made on reasonably equal terms both because France is still very strong and because Napoleon is out of the picture. Even Prussian OTL desire for a revenge is not quite there: Bernadotte received Blucher’s capitulation on the honorary terms (and treated the Swedish officers nicely) and most probably Joseph would not be pushing Prussia too hard.
Russia, if peace is made prior to Friedland, also had its peace of a military glory at Eilau (and if Nappy is killed in it, even more of it) and no national urge of a revenge.
 
Regardless of whether it was a marshall (Bernadotte again, yes) or even one of the brothers (Joseph or possibly Louis), I feel like France, Austria, Prussia and Russia would come to an arrangement that would 1) bring peace to the continent and 2) frustrate Britain. IOTL, Britain had initially considered allowing one of the brothers or even Napoleon II thru the regency of Marie-Louise to remain in power before emigre agitation and British public opinion forced them to demand a restoration of the Bourbons. Metternich was frustrated by British intransigence and feared the military might of Russia so he ultimately caved in to Britain's demands in order to prevent Europe from exchanging one form of dominance for the other.
If the next Emperor of France were to quickly take advantage of the lull in fighting and reach accomodations with the Eastern powers, France would only have Britain to deal with, and Britain would likely be forced by mercantile interests and lack of continental allies, to sue for peace as well. The tough part would be in discussing terms in this alternate Franco-British peace treaty, for I feel that the negotiations with the Eastern powers would prove to be somewhat easier because they wouldn't concern themselves with British interests. How this peace treaty between France and the Eastern powers may be something like this:
1) France would retain the territory on the left bank of the Rhine (bringing them their 'natural limits') in exchange for evacuation of Italy and the rest of Germany
2) Austria would be conpensated with the acquisition of Lombardy-Venetia (as IOTL), and tiny pieces of Bavaria.
3) Prussia could gain nearly all of Saxony and some territory on the right bank of the Rhine to serve as a buffer between them and France. They would likely regain some lands from the Grand Duchy of Warsaw as well
4) Russia would gain the lion's share of the former Grand Duchy of Warsaw and Finland.
5) I could even forsee a situation in which a German Confederation similar to the one IOTL would be created, but jointly presided by Prussia and Austria and guaranteed by Sweden and Russia.
 
Regardless of whether it was a marshall (Bernadotte again, yes) or even one of the brothers (Joseph or possibly Louis), I feel like France, Austria, Prussia and Russia would come to an arrangement that would 1) bring peace to the continent and 2) frustrate Britain. IOTL, Britain had initially considered allowing one of the brothers or even Napoleon II thru the regency of Marie-Louise to remain in power before emigre agitation and British public opinion forced them to demand a restoration of the Bourbons. Metternich was frustrated by British intransigence and feared the military might of Russia so he ultimately caved in to Britain's demands in order to prevent Europe from exchanging one form of dominance for the other.
If the next Emperor of France were to quickly take advantage of the lull in fighting and reach accomodations with the Eastern powers, France would only have Britain to deal with, and Britain would likely be forced by mercantile interests and lack of continental allies, to sue for peace as well. The tough part would be in discussing terms in this alternate Franco-British peace treaty, for I feel that the negotiations with the Eastern powers would prove to be somewhat easier because they wouldn't concern themselves with British interests. How this peace treaty between France and the Eastern powers may be something like this:
1) France would retain the territory on the left bank of the Rhine (bringing them their 'natural limits') in exchange for evacuation of Italy and the rest of Germany
2) Austria would be conpensated with the acquisition of Lombardy-Venetia (as IOTL), and tiny pieces of Bavaria.
3) Prussia could gain nearly all of Saxony and some territory on the right bank of the Rhine to serve as a buffer between them and France. They would likely regain some lands from the Grand Duchy of Warsaw as well
4) Russia would gain the lion's share of the former Grand Duchy of Warsaw and Finland.
5) I could even forsee a situation in which a German Confederation similar to the one IOTL would be created, but jointly presided by Prussia and Austria and guaranteed by Sweden and Russia.
I like the general idea of the universal peace under Emperor Joseph (unfortunately, no chance for Bernadotte even if he is my personal favorite but don’t you worry, he would be very close to the throne 😂).

But I have few comments/objections:

1. At that time France is at peace with Austria (and Austria is beaten seriously enough not to be a major player for a couple years).
2. We are talking about 1807 so with the exception of the Konigsberg area Prussia is occupied and most of its army surrendered. Getting the lost territories back would be a huge gain for Prussia.
3. While the Poles successfully liberated a big part of the Prussia-held territory, the Duchy of Warsaw (without “Grand” 😜) was officially created only at Tilsit.
4. In an absence of the CS Britain is not “isolated” because its trade with the German states, Russia and Sweden continues. OTOH, it’s absence creates a potential for the peaceful negotiations.
5. France is not defeated militarily and, with Russia and Prussia exhausted, there is no reason for the 4th Coalition to be too cocky.

Based upon the above, I don’t think that your ....er... generous territorial concessions (😜) would be on the table:
1. Prussia would be lucky to get back its pre-war territory including a “right” to re-conquer Prussian Poland from the Poles (throwing them under the bus may smell badly but formally France did not have any obligations). Saxony is definitely off the table as a member of the anti-Napoleonic 4th Coalition until December of 1807.
2. Russia is not getting any territories and at that time did not have any claims to the territorial acquisitions: 3rd (with the exception of Corfu) and 4th coalitions were absolutely altruistic exercises of idiocy caused by Alexander’s personal feelings toward Nappy. Sweden is Russian ally in the 4th Coalition so no Finland.
3. Germany is tricky. France definitely gets border on the Rhine but may retain some footprint to the East of it. This is an issue which can bring Britain into the discussion: by 1807 France is controlling pretty much all German coast and willingness to negotiate and keep the German markets open may be important enough for the Brits to compromise on the subjects of Belgium and Holland. Confederation of the Rhine may survive.
4. Austria, as a neutral state, is not a part of a deal but, if need arises, it may get back some of the territories lost in Italy. In general, fate of the Italian states may be a subject of the separate negotiations between France and Austria (perhaps with the Brits chipping in as well on the subject of Naples).
 
Joseph will take the French throne here and Eugene will get the Italian Crown (or he will need to be compensated with not small lands elsewhere).
 
So how does the Empire run under Joseph?
Can a more stable Napoleonic Europe be forged, without Napoleon himself in the driver seat?
Frankly I think the only way a Napoleonic Europe could be stable is without Napoleon...
Joseph seems to have been a rather sensible man... with him as Emperor, he could possibly have made the whole thing work out...
Intrigues would however abound.... ;)
 
Frankly I think the only way a Napoleonic Europe could be stable is without Napoleon...
Joseph seems to have been a rather sensible man... with him as Emperor, he could possibly have made the whole thing work out...
Intrigues would however abound.... ;)
Bernadotte would back Joseph and between them France will be most likely safe from its enemies internal and external
 
Bernadotte would back Joseph and between them France will be most likely safe from its enemies internal and external
Main point of contention that I could see between Joseph and Bernadotte would come over Norway... Denmark-Norway had suffered rather patiently as an ally of Napoleon, and paid the consequences via a couple of (to put it mildly) serious humiliations at the hands of the RN. Bernadotte clearly wanted Norway, but the Norwegians, for the most part, clearly didn't want to come under Swedish rule.... I'm wondering if in an Alt-TL there could be any resolutions to this that could be acceptable to both sides, but leave Norway under the Danes....
 
Top